Wednesday, January 27, 2010

"The only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from it." -- Dr. S. Radhakrishnan

During the Third Reich (from 1933 to 1945, the prime time of the Nazis in Germany), it was a strict law to greet the Fuehrer with 'Heil Hitler'. People were put into concentration camps if they refused to use this greeting (Schirrmacher, 1992). 'Heil' is the German word for 'salvation', which is extensively used in the German Bible translations. 'Salvation Hitler' or 'Salvation through Hitler' was the message that almost every German daily preached to others. Hitler addressed to his fellowship, “Workers, you must look upon me as your guarantor.” (Hitler’s speech: December 10, 1940. Berlin). The message was clear: everybody should accept that Hitler is the salvation for Germany and for the world.

Like the Nazis, it’s the central belief of the Muslim faith that salvation is not possible without Muhammad’s intercession with Allah. On judgment day, all humankind will go from one prophet to the next to ask for intercession, but all prophets from Adam to Jesus will refuse to accept this role because of their unworthiness. Ultimately, Muhammad, the great prophet of Islam; like, Adolf Hitler, the great prophet of Nazis; will accept the role of intercessor and will successfully lead his followers into paradise. As the Urdu poet, Mir Taqi Mir (cited Geisler & Saleeb, 1993, p. 88) wrote, “Why do you worry, O Mir, thinking of your black book? The person of the seal of the prophets is a guarantee for your salvation.” Muhammad was so great that even Allah showered praises on him and saluted him (Qur’an 33: 56). If Muhammad had not been, Allah himself would not have existed.

Islam is not concerned with the relationship with God and man in this world and since salvation is not possible without Muhammad; therefore, logically the most honorable way to greet Muhammad is ‘Heil Muhammad’ like Hitler preferred during his heydays. There are so many uncanny similarities between these two tyrants that if Muhammad had been contemporary to Hitler; the present author surely would have concluded that they were twin brothers of different looks, separated at birth. Both the tyrants were cut out from the same cloth. They had identical mindset, similar motives and acted in the same manner to achieve power, as we will see in the rest of this article.

A Nazi-chief and a blind follower of Hitler had declared openly (cited Dawkins, 2006. p. 277-8),

Adolf Hitler! We are united with you alone! We want to renew our vow in this hour: on this earth we believe only in Adolf Hitler. We believe that the National Socialism is the sole saving faith for our people. We believe that there is a Lord God in the heaven, who created us, who leads us, who directs us and who blesses us visibly. And we believe that this Lord God sent Adolf Hitler to us, so that Germany might become a foundation for all eternity.

National Socialism is another name of Nazism. The Nazis never hid the religious character of their actions, as seen in the following official Nazi statement (cited Schirrmacher, 1992),

National Socialism is a religion, born out of blood and race, not a political world-view. It is the new, alone true religion, born out of a Nordic spirit and an Aric [Aryan] soul. The religions still existing must disappear as soon as possible. If they do not dissolve themselves the state has to destroy them.

Nazism and communism are thoroughly beaten, and any further upheaval is impossible but with that barbarism and brutality had not been defeated yet. We should not close our eyes to the fact that these hateful ideas achieved something like a victory in defeat and reappeared again with a new name. Let’s make some small changes; only six words are replaced by new words and the above two paragraphs look like this.

Muhammad! We are united with you alone! We want to renew our vow in this hour: on this earth we believe only in Muhammad. We believe that the Islam is the sole saving faith for our people. We believe that there is an Allah in the heaven, who created us, who leads us, who directs us and who blesses us visibly. And we believe that this Allah sent Muhammad to us, so that Arabia might become a foundation for all eternity.

And,

Islam is a religion, born out of blood and race, not a political world-view. It is the new, alone true religion, born out of a Bedouin spirit and an Arabian soul. The religions still existing must disappear as soon as possible. If they do not dissolve themselves the state has to destroy them.

Throughout the Human history only these two tyrants ever had ordered the ethnic cleansing of the Jews, “Kill every Jew” (Winn, 2004. p. 369). We can call it either Nazi mindset of Islam or Islamic mindset of Nazi; the core meaning remains same. Both of them had set out to kill people not for what they did but for who they were and had a firm belief at the cause. A million Jews children were destined to concentration camps only because they existed as Jews. This is the mindset of psychopaths. There are many strange similarities between Muhammad’s teachings, Hitler’s speeches and the two equally lethal doctrines, the Mein Kamph and the Qur’an. The Nazi Party was a ruthless murder machine, so is Islam. Few examples are as follows.

“Jews are vampires who must die sooner or later.” (Mein Kampf. P. 450)

“Witness the ‘Juda verrecke’ (Jews must be destroyed) outcry in which our youth organizations have taken up.” (Mein Kampf, p. 414)

“Just issue orders to kill every Jew in the country.” (Bukhari:1.1.6)

Terrorism was an integral part of Nazism so in Islam. Both Mein Kampf and Qur’an glorified terrorism. Both the tyrants connected butchery with their cults.

“With religious conviction…the bearers of the new doctrine must declare themselves ready and willing to fight.” (Mein Kampf, p. 127)

“I [Allah] shall cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. Strike them above the necks, smite their finger tips”. (Qur’an 8.12)

“Always before god and the world the stronger has the right to carry through what he wills.” (Hitler’s speech: April 13, 1923. Munich).

“These [terror] tactics are based on an exact calculation of all human weaknesses. They will lead to success with mathematical certainty unless the other side learns to fight poison gas with poison gas.” (Mein Kampf. P. 58)

“Therefore, when you meet the unbelievers smite their necks…” (Qur’an, 47.4)

“The importance of physical terror against the individual and the masses also became clear to me.” (Mein Kampf. P. 58)

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror.’” (Bukhari: 4.52.220)

“I want war. To me all means will be right. My motto is 'Destroy him [enemy] by all and any means.' I am the one who will wage the war!” (cited Snyder, 1961, p. 66).

“… you [Muslims] have more right to hate them [Jews] than they have to hate you.” (Ishaq, p. 262)

“Let not the believers take unbelievers for friends or helpers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah.” (Qur’an: 3.28)

Both proclaimed their divine right to slaughter in God’s name, but at the same time pretended themselves to be peaceful in nature. Hitler, the cold-blooded murderer of six million Jews swore by God’s name that he wanted peace. Muhammad, who beheaded nine hundred Jews of Qurayza tribe in a single day and enslaved their women, children and confiscated their property, took help of Allah’s revelation to justify the massacre. Even today, Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran, who harbors the dream of nuking Israel, is reported to have said "We want peace for all mankind" (Ghamidi et. al, 2007. p. 256). Khomeini ordered the massacre of more than three thousand dissident boys and girls of Iran saying that he would respond to God for the butchery (Sina, 2007). It’s a disgrace to call Allah a God and Islam a religion.

“… we have the right to murder 400,000 to 500,000 people in the Nazi Revolution!” (Hitler’s speech: January 30, 1937 Berlin, Reichstag).

“The judgment whether a people is virtuous or not virtuous can hardly be passed by a human being. That should be left to God”. (Hitler’s speech: April 1, 1939; Wilhelmshaven)

“It is not ye who slew them; it is God; when thou threwest a handful of dust, it was not thy act, but God’s…..” (the killing of surrendered men of Qurayza tribe were done by the wish of Allah). (Qur’an, 8:17)

“I believe today that I am acting in the sense of the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews I am fighting for the Lord's work”. (Hitler’s speech: 1936, Reichstag)

“I do not desire war, but when it is forced upon me I shall wage it as long as I have breath in my body.” (Hitler’s speech: December 10. 1940. Berlin)

Both of them demanded unquestionable loyalty from their followers.

“They can have no Faith, until they make you (Muhammad) judge in all disputes, and find in their souls no resistance against your decisions, accepting them with complete submission.” (Qur’an 4:65)

“No Muslim has any choice after Allah and His Apostle have decided a matter.” (Qur’an 33:36)

“If in the future you continue to stand behind me as one man, in loyalty and obedience, no power in the world will be able to destroy this Movement. It will continue its victorious course. If you preserve the same discipline, the same obedience, the same comradeship and the same unbounded loyalty in the future - then nothing will ever extinguish this Movement in Germany”. (Hitler’s speech: April 08, 1933. Berlin, Sportpalast)

“We used to take oaths to Muhammad that we would listen to and obey his orders.” (Muslim: 22.20.4604)

“We have in our Movement developed this loyalty in following the leader, this blind obedience of which all the others know nothing and which gave to us the power to surmount everything”. (Hitler’s speech: April 08, 1933. Berlin, Sportpalast)

Both the psychopaths glorified martyrdom and were happiest when their followers were dying for them.

“And now on foreign soil National Socialism has gained its first conscious martyr - a man who did nothing save to enter the lists for Germany which is not only his sacred right but his duty in this world: a man who did nothing save remember his homeland and pledge himself to her in loyalty”. (Hitler’s speech: February 12, 1936. Schwerin, Gustloff's funeral)

“Unless you stake your life, never will life be won. The sacrifice of one’s existence is the most essential supposition for the formation and preservation of a State with the necessary feeling of homogeneity. The readiness to risk one’s life for this with all means possible, is something that will lead to the creation of heroic virtues.” (Mein Kampf, p.198)

“For those who fought and were killed in My Cause, I shall blot out their sins and admit them indeed to Paradise.” (Qur’an: 3.195)

Neither of them wanted peaceful co-existence with others.

“There are only two possibilities: either victory of the Aryan, or annihilation of the Aryan and the victory of the Jew”. (Hitler’s speech: April 12, 1922. Munich)

“The Messenger said, ‘Two religions cannot coexist in the Arabian Peninsula.’ Umar investigated the matter, then sent to the Jews, saying: ‘Allah has given permission for you to be expelled.” (Tabari VIII:130).

“The whole world of nature is a mighty struggle between strength and weakness - an eternal victory of the strong over the weak.”(Hitler’s speech: April 13, 1923. Munich)

Liberty, freedom of speech and democracy were not recognized in Nazism so in Islam. They were created to serve one man. As Hurgronje wrote, “Islam has never favoured Democratic tendencies”. As King Faud of Saudi Arabia quoted, “The democratic system that is predominant in the world is not a suitable system for the peoples of our region…The system of free election is not suitable to our country.” (cited Warraq, 1995. p. 172). The core message of Islam is to obey Muhammad and fight and die for his cause. Qur’an is a morally and spiritually bankrupt doctrine and Muhammad knew that his holy book would never withstand the scrutiny of a free society.

“Freedom of the press is a nuisance that allows unpunishable lies to poison the people.” (Mein Kampf, p. 335)

“Profane liberty with these words, ‘If you don’t join with us, we will crack your skull!’” (Mein Kampf, p. 65)

“The Prophet said, ‘A Muslim has to listen to and obey the order of his ruler whether he likes it or not.’” [There will never be a stable Islamic democracy.](Bukhari: 9.89.258)

“Democracy is a universal plague. It creates a monstrosity of filth and fire. Fate showed me how ridiculous a parliament is as an institution.” (Mein Kampf, p. 99)

“The invention of democracy is a crying shame…. A majority can never replace the Man.” (Mein Kampf. P. 104).

“Democracy shuns sunlight.” (Mein Kampf, p. 116)

“You of [the Islamic] Faith, say not (to the Prophet) words of ambiguous import like ‘Listen to us,’ but words of respect; and obey (him): To those who don’t submit there is a grievous punishment.” (Qur'an: 2.104).

“The mass of people are not sufficiently developed to arrive at a political opinion by themselves and thus are not suited to select the leader.” (Mein Kampf, p. 107)

Both of them were self appointed guardian of their Nations. Hitler’s idea of Arian supremacy matches well with Muhammad’s idea of Arab Supremacy.

“I know that the whole German nation is behind me. I am the guardian of its future and I act accordingly.”(Hitler’s speech: December 10, 1940. Berlin)

“O Prophet! We have sent you as a guardian of the illiterates [Arabs]” (Bukhari, 3.34.335)

“The Prophet said, ‘I will not intercede for those or love them who are not fair with the Arabs.’” (Tirmizi, Vol. 2. p. 840)

Qur’an was never meant for non-Muslims to read. Similarly Mein Kampf was not for outsiders.

“With this work I do not address myself to strangers, but to those adherents of the movement who belong to it with their hearts and whose reason now seeks a more intimate enlightenment.” (Mein Kampf: Preface)

“Allah’s Apostle forbade the people to travel to a hostile country carrying copies of the Qur’an. Unbelievers will never understand our signs and revelations.” (Bukhari: 4.52.233)

Both the tyrants viewed economical growth in the same way. The Islamic economy and domination was based upon piracy and militancy and ravaging other’s economy. Even today peaceful economic policy is discouraged. Khomeini once said (Fara et. al, 1996, p. 69) “Economics is a preoccupation of donkeys”. With this type of attitude, how Iran’s national economy is expected to come up?

“So enjoy what you took as booty; the spoils are lawful and good.” (Qur’an: 8.069)

“The talk of ‘peaceful economic conquest’ of the world is the greatest folly that has ever been perpetrated. It is nonsense….Weapons are required for success. Mercenaries can be used but a nation must dip into its most valuable blood and make sacrifices to bring about victory.” (Mein Kampf, p. 188).

Both Hitler and Muhammad realized that thorough brainwashing is required from the early childhood days to erode their consciences and to poison their minds. In Cologne, the children receiving meals from the Nazi state during the Second World War had to pray before the meal, “Fold your hands, bow your head and think about Adolf Hitler. He gives us our daily bread and helps us out of every misery” (Schirrmacher, 1992). Similarly, as per Sunan Abu Dawud: 2.0495, Muhammad advised, “Command your children to pray when they become seven years old, and beat them for it (prayer) when they become ten years old; and arrange their beds (to sleep) separately”. This is how evil dominates all aspects of Muslim society.

Hitler wrote Mein Kampf (My Struggle) from Landsberg on the Lech prison in 1924 in two volumes of about one thousand pages in total. It was written about thirteen centuries after Qur’an was written. But the strange similarities between these two doctrines lead the present author to one obvious question – Was Hitler influenced by Muhammad and Islam? In this article only a few similarities are mentioned, but Craig Winn, in his excellent e-book ‘Prophet of doom’ had recorded hundreds such similarities (Winn, 2004). From his scholarly observation, it is very clear that apart from time and place Islam and Nazism are almost indistinguishable and are different sides of the same coin. The only difference is that Hitler had a vastly superior intellect and was a better writer than were either Muhammad or his Allah.

The translators of Mein Kampf said, “Hitler attempted to make himself the ‘prophet’ of the new German religion…. He believed that if a new ‘myth’ could be created and propagated as stubbornly, it would give Germans a new faith which the masses would cherish as tenaciously as they previously followed Christianity.” So Nazism was a replacement or substitute religion of Christianity. But Islam is also a weak imitation of Christianity and Judaism. As per Carlyle (cited Warraq, 1995, p. 23), Islam is a confused form of Christianity, a bastard kind of Christianity, shorn of its absurd details. It is logical to conclude that Hitler was highly influenced by Islamic scriptures.

All the public speeches, Mein Kampf and Islamic scriptures reveal the full flavor of the respective author’s mind and expose their motivations. None of the psychopaths ever valued human lives. Both had suffered unhappy childhoods and their murderous behavior didn’t begin until they were halfway through their careers. They had the same opinion about common people. Hitler wrote, “I saw the world in three groups: the fighters, the lukewarm, and the traitors.” (Mein Kampf. P. 16). Muhammad saw the Arabs as either good fighters in his cause, useless hypocrites, or enemy infidels. Both Nazism and Islam are rigid, intolerant, born in blood, and progressed by brutal force. Both Muhammad and Hitler succeeded in seducing a sufficient number of rebels into submission to terrorize the world. Both the psychopaths poisoned their victims with their doctrines and speeches, which turned good men bad. The followers behaved exactly like their leaders.

The last time we were ignorant of such a hateful and violent doctrine, the world paid a horrible price, as Hitler led to the holocaust and to the brutal death of fifty-five million people in Second World War. This is the devastating consequence of the world’s ignorance and tolerance of Mein Kampf which is still vivid in our memory. Today humanity is passing through another worse phase of life. Our history speaks of many wars that have been fought in the past, but the third and the final war of the era would be the most decisive and most horrible one without a parallel. Today a synthesis of Nazism and modern technology will claim billions of innocent lives.

We must shed our ignorance and tolerance, and remove the mask of religiosity from Islam so that we might defend ourselves from its racial hatred and intolerance, its desire to wipe out the non-Muslims out to the last. Islam is Nazism revisited with a new name and claimed its religious status by creating a dummy God Allah, which is a mockery of real God. Islam does not deserve the unwarranted protection it is granted vis-à-vis its religious status. These new Nazis have unlimited financial resources (oil-money), nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and countless number of Human bombs. This new Nazism needs to be exposed and the new Nazis need to be dealt with iron fist if we want to survive.

Probably we can take some lesson from the Israelis. Almost every Muslim overwhelmingly wants Israel annihilated, along with all the Jews. The Jews, meanwhile, only want to live with dignity. There are many examples in history where Jews lived in relative harmony over hundreds of years with others with mutual trust and respect and in total absence of any conflict. No wise man can regard Jews as an enemy, but as a blessing to the neighborhood. Living in peace and harmony is the ‘mantra’ of the Jews, but their fate is such that every war Israel has fought, since returning to her land, has only set the stage for the next war. There is a vast difference between Islam and Jewish beliefs. Islam was forced upon people but Judaism strongly opposes forced conversions. The Hebrew Bible prohibits killing in the Ten Commandments and completely rejects and deplores suicide. The Old Testament Torah delineates the Land of Israel where the Jewish people lived. Jews do not seek expansion beyond the land of Israel. Israel has withdrawn its army from territories captured after each war. But Judaism also states that "If one comes to slay you, slay him first" (from Talmudic Tractate Brachos 58, a sacred text of Judaism). We should deal with present day Nazism in the same manner.

Good citizens may reform governments but ultimately our own survival depends on us – our actions and inactions. As long as we realize this, freedom will survive and our children will live in a free world. The world is what we make it, or what we fail to make it. This is what we can learn from the tiny minority of Jews. They are the frontline fighters against Islamic evil force that threatens to throw the humanity back to the darkest days of barbaric cultures. Jews are fighting not for their own freedom but for the freedom of the whole Human race. Freedom is a continuing struggle, won one moment at a time. There are many who would take it from you, but no one who can give it to you. Today the Humankind is facing an enemy, which is more blood trusty than Nazi party. No amount of land concessions and foreign aid will appease these fanatics. No amount of revisionist history will also pacify them. Only death and destruction of all infidels will quench the beast's appetite for blood and power. How pathetic it is that a superpower like the USA, in spite of showering billions of dollars in the Muslim-world's oppressed and poverty stricken people, cannot win their gratitude. The great Ummah will always view America as ‘a great Satan’. What about Bangladeshis, Sudanese and Egyptians; whose daily bread and butter mostly come from foreign aid? Do they think twice before chanting ‘death to America’?

Probably it is too late and the signs of the Third World War are already on the horizon. Maybe the doomsday clock already began to tick. Several Muslim nations are in mad nuclear arm race while millions of their own people are dying of starvation, disease and civil war. Pakistani nuclear scientist Q. A. Khan had already had done his Islamic duty by selling nuclear secrets to Iraq, Iran, Libya and North Korea. During April 2006, Iran's president, Ahmadinejad, announced on national TV that his country had enriched uranium to a level required for nuclear fuel. There are reports that Kyrgyzstan, Syria and Turkey are also not far behind (Morgan, 2007). Also the collapse of the Soviet Union led to the possibility that former Soviet nuclear weapons might become available on the black market, which is a lure to the terrorists.

Nazis had put their blind trust on Hitler for salvation. History had recorded that; Hitler had given the Germans meaningless death, destruction and humiliation in return instead of salvation. After the defeat of the Nazis, the whole German nation was put to shame when they were held responsible for the actions of the Nazi regime, often using the terms "collective guilt", and "collective responsibility” (Wikipedia, 2008). Even today the Germans are often scorned by elderly people who were alive to experience the atrocities committed by Nazi Germans during Second World War.

What a tragedy, the Nazi leader who was a “guarantor” of salvation, had to commit suicide to escape capture by the opposition. Most of the fellow Nazis were haunted down and died a dog’s death. Many were put to forced manual labor for rest of their lives. But millions of people lost their lives before Germans wake up with the fact that Hitler was a narcissist, a liar, a madman and a psychopath who had fed them with lies and had driven them to devastation. A leaflet published during 1942 recorded, “Every word that comes from Hitler's mouth is a lie. When he says peace, he means war, and when he blasphemously uses the name of the Almighty, he means the power of evil, the fallen angel, Satan.” (The White Rose Society, 1942)

With Third World War, the history will repeat itself. History often repeats itself because, as Radhakrishnan (1970, p. 125) quoted, “The only lesson history teaches us is that we learn nothing from history”. Muslims had already sold their soul to Muhammad and put their blind trust on him for salvation and an entry to paradise in the same way the Germans had put their trust on Hitler. Though the infidel world will face the biggest onslaught in the history of mankind but the Muslim world will be completely destroyed and Islam will be declared a criminal organization and a banned cult like Nazism. This is not a prophecy or a wishful thinking but this is what the Nazis had faced when Second World War ended.

The third World War will be the war between Dharma (Justice) and Adharma (Injustice) and Dharma will be reestablished on a firm footing after the extinction of Adharma forever. May be this is the long awaited 'great purification’. Weapons of mass destruction will be used ruthlessly. Muslims in horror will witness many gigantic mushroom clouds rising over in many places across the Ummah (Global Muslim world) including Islam’s two holiest cities and the sky will be lit up ‘brighter than a thousand suns’. The flames of hell and society’s cruel punishment awaiting sinners right here on earth.

None shall be the winner in the end but Humanity will still survive. Muhammad, his Qur’an, and his Islam will earn the same fate what Hitler, Mein Kampf and Nazism had earned. The Ummah will be reduced to a microscopic minority without any hope of revival. Probably that will be the time when they will wake up to give way to logical thinking though like Germans, it would be too late for them.

Saturday, January 16, 2010

Chronicles of the Crusades: Eyewitness accounts of the wars between Christianity and Islam ed. by E Hallam, Wiedenfield & Nicolson, London, 1989

The very word ‘Islam’ means ‘submission’ in Arabic and the violent history of that religion leaves no doubt as to why it has come to be called by that name, drenched as it is in the blood of countless hundreds of thousands of Europeans.

Islam: Born in conflict

Islam’s founder, Muhammed claimed in 610AD to have received a message from Allah to start that religion. In 617 he began to preach in the city of Mecca but was not well received. A popular revolt against his teachings forced him to flee for his life in 622.He found refuge in the rival city of Medina, where his message found more fertile ground. Soon he had a fairly large following and, within the year, Muhammed issued Islam’s very first “holy war” order – the jihad – against Mecca. Using his status as founder of that religion, Muhammed created the precedent still used today of justifying violent conquest in the name of Islam, by claiming that it was Allah’s will.An eight year long war then erupted between Medina and Mecca, which ended with Muhammed’s forces being victorious. Muhammed became ruler of Medina and Mecca in 630. The first Islamic state had been founded, born out of war, violence, bloodshed and aggressive conquest.Muhammed saw that it was easier to spread his religion through violent coercion rather than preaching and in two years his muslim armies had, through open warfare, seized the majority of the Arabian peninsula, and had forcibly converted it to Islam.

Islam’s continued violent expansion

Muhammed died in 632. his successors continued with the policy of violently expanding the reach of Islam: Syria was conquered in 636; Jerusalem and Persia were conquered in 637; and, in 641, the by now thoroughly blood-soaked muslim army captured Alexandria, and started forcing Islam on what is today Egypt.Sweeping through North Africa, the muslim armies took Tunisia in 698. By 709, their army stood at the Straights of Gibraltar, with only the fortress of Cueta, situated on the African side of the Straight still in Spanish hands.

Islam violently attacks mainland Europe

Two years of ferocious assaults by the muslims, by now called ‘Moors’, led to the fall of Cueta in 711. The Moors then seized a beachhead on Andalusia in Spain, their first territory on the European mainland. The Spanish king Roderic rushed an army south and engaged the Moors in a three day battle at Xeres. The Spanish were defeated and, within a few months, the Muslims had violently seized most of Spain and Portugal, putting to death untold tens of thousands of Europeans.

The ‘Tribute’ of 100 white virgins per year

The subjugated Spanish were subjected to the full horror of muslim rule, as exemplified in the ‘100 virgins a year’ treaty they were forced to sign. In terms of this treaty, the Spaniards had to hand over 100 white virgins to the muslims for use in their harems – a painful tribute which continued until 791, when the treaty was broken.The Islamic jihad against Europe continued: in 722, the muslim armies had crossed the Pyrenees and invaded France, seizing several towns. In 732 they launched a massive assault, under the command of the moorish governor of Spain, Abd arRahman, on central France. Huge regions were utterly laid waste and the inhabitants forced to convert to Islam or be executed on the spot.

Charles Martel defeats muslim invasion

The Paris based king of the Franks, Charles Martel, mobilised a counter attack against the muslim invasion. Charles met Abd arRahman in battle between the towns of Tours and Poitiers, in October 732. the future of Europe hinged on the battle: defeat for the Europeans would have seen all of Western Europe fall under the sway of Islam. An epic seven day battle ensued. In the first six days of the battle, the archers and cavalry of the Moors seemed to have the advantage, but on the seventh day, the main body of fighting closed to hand-to-hand combat. Here the greater physical stature of the Franks counted for more – with the Frankish king Charles earning the name Martel (“hammer”) at this battle in recognition of the mighty and fatal strokes with which he personally killed dozens, if not hundreds, of moors.The muslims fled south, suffering the first reverse in their plans of violent conquest. The Franks followed up with an attack against the town of Narbonne in 755, and six years later, after much fighting and blood-letting, the last of the muslims were driven from all of France.

Phew! well that covers some of its first 100 years, and already we have quite a body count. OK, quick slurp of ale and let's plough on shall we?

The European re-conquest of Spain

The muslims still held the Iberian peninsula. In 778, Charlemagne, Charles Martel’s grandson, launched an invasion into northern Spain which recaptured much of the territory north of the Ebo river from the control of Islam. The European counter-attack had started.Slowly but surely, small parts of northern Spain were liberated from the harsh muslim rule by local princes. In July 1212, the muslims were defeated at the battle of Toledo, but in December 1482, they seized the town of Zahara, only 15 miles from Seville.

The Ten Years War: Islamic invaders expelled from Spain

The muslim attack on Zahara sparked the Ten Years’ War: under the combined leadership of Queen Isabella 1 and her husband, Ferdinand V, the Spaniards counter attacked.In 1482, the European armies seized Alhama from the muslims. Between 1483 and 1486 the Spanish drove the muslims out of the western half of the kingdom of Grenada. With the capture of the city of Malaga in 1487, followed in quick succession by the fall of the towns of Baza, Almeria and Gaudix in campaigns during 1488 to 1489, the Europeans closed in on the last muslim stronghold - the citadel of Grenada. The siege of Grenada lasted from July 1491 to January 1492. Finally the muslims were forced to surrender, and they and their religion were expelled from Spain. Islam’s 781-year long attempt, violently to seize western Europe, had failed.

Islam attacks Italy: The Hill of the Martyrs

Setbacks in Spain did not deter Islam’s desire to conquer other parts of mainland Europe. In 1479, under the leadership of Mohammed II, the muslims attacked the island of Rhodes off Greece, only being repulsed by a European defence force under the Knights of St. John. Undeterred, Mohammed the II then invaded Italy itself, seizing the city of Otranto in the kingdom of Naples. Of the 22,000 inhabitants captured by the Muslims 12,000 were bound with ropes and tortured to death outside the city walls. The muslims also killed all the Christian priests they could find. On a hill outside the city, still known as Martyr’s hill they killed many captives who refused to convert to Islam.

Islam attacks south eastern Europe

In 717AD, the muslims under Caliph Velid launched a furious attack upon the capital of the eastern Roman Empire, Constantinople. Through feats of incredible bravery, the Europeans managed to hold on to the city fortress. A new muslim attack was planned: Led by Osman, a new muslim army was formed. The followers of Osman became known as the Osmanlilar, (“those associated with Osman”), or as they became known in the west, the Ottomans.By 1330, the muslim Ottomans had fought their way to the Aegean Sea, and in that year the first islamic army stood at the Bosphorous Straights, directly opposite Constantinople. In 1354, they attacked and plundered the city of Gallipoli, and poured troops into south Eastern Europe.Marching into the Balkans, the Muslims defeated a Bulgarian army and then advanced into Serbia, defeating that country’s army at the Battle of Kosovo in 1389. During that battle, a Serbian soldier killed the Ottoman leader, Murad. After the battle was over, the Muslims cruelly tortured and executed the captured Serbian prince, Lazar, as a reprisal.

Muslim army advances into central Europe

A combined European army attempted to halt the Islamic invasion in 1396, where they met the muslim tyrants at the battle of Nicopolis on the Danube river. The Europeans were defeated, and the muslims celebrated their victory by executing thousands of prisoners they had taken during the battle, in a bloodthirsty massacre lasting several hours.In 1439, Serbia was formally annexed to the muslim empire and in 1440 Belgrade was besieged. In 1444 another attempt by the Europeans to defeat the Islamic army ended in failure at the Battle of Varne in Bulgaria.

The Janissaries: White children abducted by the invading Muslims

The muslim leader Emir Orkhan, issued an edict to the conquered Europeans in the Balkans that they had to hand over to the Ottomans 1,000 white male babies “with faces shining white” each and every year. These abducted children were raised as muslims, and were compelled to serve the Ottomans, with their origins being concealed from them. They became the best armed unit within the Ottoman Empire, known as the Janissaries. This annual tribute continued for 300 years until 1648 and the Janissaries were only disbanded in 1826, after they rebelled against their masters.

Constantinople falls to Islam: Renamed Istanbul

The city of Constantinople had managed to hold on grimly through all these muslim advances: far behind the muslim front line, the city grew weaker and weaker. Finally, in 1453, the muslim army launched a mighty effort to break the city. After bombarding the city walls with cannon fire for months, a determined overnight attack saw the city fall at last – the official end of the Eastern Roman Empire, defended only by 7,000 knights from all over Europe against a muslim army numbering in the hundreds of thousands.The Venetian ship’s doctor, Nicolo Barbaro, who was at the battle, recorded the terrible revenge exacted upon the remaining Europeans.“The Turks put the city to the sword as they came, and everyone they found in their way they slashed with their scimitars, women and men, old and young, of every condition, and this slaughter continued from dawn until midday. They sought out the convents and all the nuns were taken to the ships and abused and dishonoured by the Turks, and they were all sold at auction as slaves and taken to Turkey, and similarly the young women were all dishonoured and sold at auction; some preferred to throw themselves into wells and drown. These Turks loaded their ships with people and a great treasure. They had this custom; when they entered a house, they would at once raise a flag with their own device, and when other Turks saw such a flag raised, no other Turk would for the world go into that house but would go looking for a house that had no flag; it was the same with all the convents and churches. Blood flowed on the ground as though it were raining.”

In recent weeks there has been much soul-searching, in the Islamic world and among the wider Muslim diaspora about whether Islam is compatible with democracy. This sparked a debate hosted by Intelligence2, a forum I took part in last week. As an Iranian now living in a liberal democracy, I would like to explain why Islam and democracy are essentially incompatible.

To understand a civilisation it is important to comprehend the language that shapes it. There was no word in any of the Muslim languages for democracy until the 1890s. Even then the Greek word entered Muslim vocabulary with little change: democrasi in Persian, dimokraytiyah in Arabic, demokratio in Turkish.

Democracy is based on one fundamental principle: equality.

The Greek word isos is used in more than 200 compound nouns, including isoteos (equality), isologia (equal or free speech) and isonomia (equal treatment).

Again we find no equivalent in any of the Muslim languages. The words we have such as barabari in Persian and sawiyah in Arabic mean juxtaposition or separation.

Nor do we have a word for politics. The word siassah, now used as a synonym for politics, initially meant whipping stray camels into line. (Sa'es al-kheil is a person who brings back lost camels to the caravan.) The closest translation may be: regimentation.

Nor is there mention of such words as government and the state in the Koran. Early Muslims translated numerous ancient Greek texts, but never those related to political matters.

The idea of equality is unacceptable to Islam. For the non-believer cannot be the equal of the believer. Even among the believers only those who subscribe to the three Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam, known as the "people of the book" (Ahl el-Kitab), are regarded as fully human. Here, too, there is a hierarchy, with Muslims at the top.

Non-Muslims can, and have often been, treated with decency, but never as equals. There is a hierarchy even for animals and plants. Seven animals and seven plants will assuredly go to heaven while seven others of each will end up in hell.

Democracy means the rule of the demos, the common people, or what is now known as popular or national sovereignty. In Islam, however, power belongs only to God: al-hukm l'illah. The man who exercises that power on Earth is known as Khalifat al-Allah, the regent of God. Even then the Khalifah, or Caliph, cannot act as legislator. The law has already been spelt out and fixed forever by God.

The only task that remains is its discovery, interpretation and application. That, of course, allows for a substantial space in which different styles of rule could develop.

But the bottom line is that no Islamic government can be democratic in the sense of allowing the common people equal shares in legislation. Islam divides human activities into five categories from the permitted to the sinful, leaving little room for human interpretation, let alone ethical innovations.

To say that Islam is incompatible with democracy should not be seen as a disparagement of Islam. On the contrary, many Muslims would see it as a compliment because they believe that their idea of rule by God is superior to that of rule by men, which is democracy.

The great Persian poet Rumi pleads thus:

Oh, God, do not leave our affairs to us For, if You do, woe is us.

Islamic tradition holds that God has always intervened in the affairs of men, notably by dispatching 124,000 prophets or emissaries to inform the mortals of his wishes and warnings.

Many Islamist thinkers regard democracy with horror.

The late Ayatollah Khomeini called democracy "a form of prostitution", because he who gets the most votes wins the power that belongs only to God.

Sayyid Qutb, the Egyptian who has emerged as the ideological mentor of Salafists (fundamentalists who want to return to the idyllic Islamic state of their forebears) spent a year in the United States in the 1950s. He found "a nation that has forgotten God and been forsaken by Him; an arrogant nation that wants to rule itself".

Last year Yussuf al-Ayyeri, one of the leading theoreticians of today's Islamist movement, published a book in which he warned that the real danger to Islam did not come from American tanks and helicopter gunships in Iraq but from the idea of democracy and the government of the people.

Maudoodi, another of the Islamist theoreticians now fashionable, dreamt of a political system in which humans would act as automatons in accordance with rules set by God.

He said that God has arranged man's biological functions in such a way that their operation is beyond human control. For our non-biological functions, notably our politics, God has also set rules that we have to discover and apply once and for all so that our societies can be on autopilot, so to speak.

The late Saudi theologian, Sheikh Muhammad bin Ibrahim al-Jubair, a man I respected though seldom agreed with, believed that the root cause of contemporary ills was the spread of democracy.

"Only one ambition is worthy of Islam," he liked to say, "to save the world from the curse of democracy: to teach men that they cannot rule themselves on the basis of man-made laws. Mankind has strayed from the path of God, we must return to that path or face certain annihilation."

Those who claim that Islam is compatible with democracy should know that they are not flattering Muslims.

In the past 14 centuries Muslims have, on occasions, succeeded in creating successful societies without democracy. And there is no guarantee that democracy never produces disastrous results (after all, Hitler was democratically elected).

The fact that almost all Muslim states today can be rated as failures or, at least, underachievers, is not because they are Islamic but because they are ruled by corrupt and despotic elites that, even when they proclaim an Islamist ideology, are, in fact, secular dictators.

Socrates ridiculed the myth of democracy by pointing out that men always call on experts to deal with specific tasks, but when it comes to the more important matters concerning the community, they allow every Tom, Dick and Harry an equal say.

In response his contemporary, Protagoras, one of the original defenders of democracy, argued: "People in the cities, especially in Athens, listen only to experts in matters of expertise, but when they meet for consultation on the political art, ie of the general question of government, everybody participates."

Traditional Islamic political thought is closer to Socrates than to Protagoras. The common folk, al-awwam, are regarded as "animals". The interpretation of the divine law is reserved only for the experts.

Political power, like many other domains including philosophy, is reserved for the "khawas" who, in some Sufi traditions, are even exempt from the rituals of the faith.

The "common folk", however, must do as they are told either by the text and tradition or by fatwas (edicts) issued by the experts. Khomeini used the word "mustazafeen" (the feeble ones) to describe the general population.

Islam is about certainty (iqan) while democracy is about doubt. Islam cannot allow people to do as they please, even in the privacy of their bedrooms, because God is always present, all-hearing and all-seeing.

There is consultation in Islam: wa shawerhum fil amr (and consult them in matters). But, here, consultation is about specifics only, never about the overall design of society.

In democracy there is a constitution that can be amended or changed. The Koran, however, is the immutable word of God, beyond amendment or change.

This debate is not an easy one to have, because Islam has become an issue of political controversy in the West.

On the one hand we have Islamophobia, a particular affliction of those who blame Islam for all the ills of our world. Some Muslims regard any criticism of Islam as Islamophobia.

On the other hand we have Islamoflattery, which claims that everything good under the sun came from Islam. (According to a recent BBC documentary on Islam, even cinema was invented in the 9th century by a Muslim lens maker in Baghdad, named Abu-Hufus!)

This is often practised by a new generation of the Turques de profession, westerners who are prepared to apply the rules of critical analysis to everything under the sun except Islam.

They think they are doing Islam a favour. They are not.

Depriving Islam of critical scrutiny is bad for Islam and Muslims, and ultimately dangerous for the whole world. There are 57 nations in the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC). Not one is yet a democracy.

We should not allow the everything-is-equal-to-everything-else fashion of postmodernist multiculturalism and political correctness to prevent us from acknowledging differences and even incompatibilities in the name of a soggy consensus. If we are all the same, how can we have a dialogue of civilisations?

Muslims should not be duped into believing that they can have their cake and eat it. Muslims can build successful societies provided they treat Islam as a matter of personal, private belief and not as a political ideology that seeks to monopolise the public space shared by the whole of humanity and dictate every aspect of individual and community life. Islam is incompatible with democracy.

A sharia bill that would see convicted thieves have their hands amputated has sparked strong opposition among Acehenese, who believe the punishment should be imposed on those guilty of corruption.

Irwandi Yusuf, who is currently leading vote counting in the Aceh gubernatorial election, said he would never approve the bill, which was announced by local authorities last week.

"I will never agree to such a stiff bill. Common people steal because they're hungry and they usually commit such crimes because their situation forces them to do so. It is not fair to impose such a harsh sanction on the common people," he told The Jakarta Post here Friday.

Irwandi, a former rebel leader who studied postgraduate veterinary science in Oregon in the U.S., said it would be more fair to impose amputation on people who stole public funds.

"If the harsh bill is imposed on corrupters it will effectively help eliminate or minimize the corruption that has contributed to the poverty of a majority of the Acehnese people," he said.

"Sharia law was created not to get humans in trouble but to form an Islamic religious community. How can we prohibit people from stealing what they need to survive after their rights have long since been stolen. The bill will be effective only after the people's social welfare has improved," he said.

Banda Aceh residents questioned the political motives behind the bill, saying the province was in need of qanun, or official code, on corruption.

Becak driver Ali, 29, said he thought the bill was unfair and called on the provincial legislature and government to drop it.

"The bill will bring suffering to the poor because only the poor usually commit such violations," he said.

Feminist Naimah Hasan said the bill was regrettable and urged the government to let civil society discuss it before it was submitted to the provincial legislature for deliberation.

She questioned the provincial sharia office's political moves behind the sharia bylaws, saying that the government should not try to win the public's support through such bills.

"We have already had a qanun on stoning for women in adultery cases and on caning for gamblers and liquor distributors and consumers and we'll have another harsh qanun on hand amputation for thieves. All the qanuns target vulnerable groups and the poor. But no measures are being taken against corrupters and those who make a lot of money through gambling," she said.

Other members of the public are not aware of the bill. Mufi, a student at Syiah Kuala University, and Zubaidah, a market trader, both said they were shocked to hear of the plan.

* Chapter 5: Anyone stealing others' belongings equal to 94 grams of gold or more faces the threat of a maximum 60 canings (uqubuat ta'zir) and a minimum 20 canings or a maximum fine of Rp 60 million and a minimum Rp 20 million or a maximum ten years' imprisonment and a minimum 39-month jail sentence.

* Chapter 7: Anyone stealing others' belongings equal to six but less than 46 grams of gold faces the threat of 15 canings at maximum and five caning in minimum, a maximum fine of Rp 15 million and a minimum Rp 5 million or a maximum 30 month-jail sentence and minimum ten-month jail sentence.

* Chapter 8: Anyone stealing others' belongings equal to less than six grams of gold faces a maximum five canings and minimum two canings, or a maximum fine of 5 million and Rp 2 million in minimum, or a maximum ten-month jail sentence and a minimum four-month jail sentence.

sumber : jakartapost-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Sahih Bukahri, Volume 8, Book 81, Number 791: Narrated Abu Huraira:Allah 's Apostle said, "Allah curses the thief who steals an egg (or a helmet) for which his hand is to be cut off, or steals a rope, for which his hand is to be cut off."Sahih Bukahri, Volume 8, Book 81, Number 780:Narrated 'Aisha:The Prophet said, "The hand should be cut off for stealing something that is worth a quarter of a Dinar or more."Sahih Bukahri, Volume 8, Book 81, Number 781:Narrated 'Aisha:The Prophet said, "The hand of a thief should be cut off for stealing a quarter of a Dinar."Sahih Bukahri, Volume 8, Book 81, Number 782:Narrated 'Aisha:The Prophet said, "The hand should be cut off for stealing a quarter of a Dinar."Sahih Bukahri, Volume 8, Book 81, Number 785:Narrated 'Aisha: A thief's hand was not cut off for stealing somethingcheaper than a Hajafa or a Turs (two kinds of shields), each of which was worth a (respectable) price.Sahih Bukahri, Volume 8, Book 81, Number 786:Narrated 'Aisha: A thief's hand was not cut off for stealing something worth less than the price of a shield, whether a Turs or Hajafa (two kinds of shields), each of which was worth a (respectable) price.Sahih Bukahri, Volume 8, Book 81, Number 787:Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Allah's Apostle cut off the hand of a thief for stealing a shield that was worth three Dirhams.Sahih Bukahri, Volume 8, Book 81, Number 788:Narrated Ibn 'Umar: The Prophet cut off the hand of a thief for stealing a shield that was worth three Dirhams.

Sahih Bukahri, Volume 8, Book 81, Number 789:Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: The Prophet cut off the hand of a thief for stealing a shield that was worth three Dirhams.Sahih Bukahri, Volume 8, Book 81, Number 790:Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: The Prophet cut off the hand of a thief for stealing a shield that was worth three Dirhams.

Shahih Bukhari, Vol 8, Book 82. Hadith 801.Narrated By Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "The one who commits an illegal sexual intercourse is not a believer at the time of committing illegal sexual intercourse and a thief is not a believer at the time of committing theft and a drinker of alcoholic drink is not a believer at the time of drinking. Yet, (the gate of) repentance is open thereafter."Shahih Bukhari, Vol 8, Book 81. Hadith 763.Narrated By Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, "When an adulterer commits illegal sexual intercourse, then he is not a believer at the time he is doing it; and when somebody drinks an alcoholic drink, then he is not believer at the time of drinking, and when a thief steals, he is not a believer at the time when he is stealing; and when a robber robs and the people look at him, then he is not a believer at the time of doing it." Abu Huraira in another narration, narrated the same from the Prophet with the exclusion of robbery.Malik Muwatta. Book 41. The Mudabbar. Hadith 028.Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Safwan ibn Abdullah ibn Safwan that it was said to Safwan ibn Umayya, "Whoever does not do hijra is ruined." So Safwan ibn Umayya went to Madina and slept in the mosque with his cloak as a pillow. A thief came and took his cloak and Safwan grabbed hold of the thief and brought him to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said to him, "Did you steal this cloak?" He said, "Yes." So the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered that his hand be cut off. Safwan said to him, "I did not intend this. It is his as sadaqa." The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Why didn't you do it before bringing him to me?"